Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tamron 24-70 newspaper test
#1
Hi everybody,



I purchased the new Tamron lens, for my Canon 5dm2. As I am no pro, or can I do any advanced test chart so I settled on the newspaper test chart and the simple centering chart.

I struggled to keep everything as parallel/straight as possible. Shot with mirror lock up, self timer.

Here is the RAW image of the newspaper test that seemed to me to be the best from the I made:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?sli3l6a82g20mkk

Here are some 100% crops of the image save with Digital photo professional in uncompressed Jpeg, with 5 sharpness(out of 10; Contrast :1, other parameters are default/0.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

Here are some brick wall photos so you can see the distortions:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/



As I said, I don't know what to expect from this lens, so if anyone of you would be kind enough to give me your opinion I would be happy to hear it. If you think this lens copy is no good let me know so i return it(please explain why), or if you think the tests are not performed correctly, let me know so i redo them. Thank you.
#2
It looks generally fine to me (although the max sizes are a bit smallish).





The unfocused chart image looks slightly irregular. The effect is also visible in the in-focus chart image where the lower edge transitions are marginally softer.

However, such zoom lenses are never 100% perfect and in my book this would be a valid sample I think.
#3
Thank you Klaus for your feedback. As I haven't owned a 24-70 lens before, I didn't know what to expect. Can you tell me how would the sample I have compare with the one you have tested, or with the 24-70 Canon ver.1? I did read the review, but i really don't know how to compare the results. If it was you would you been happy with this lens, or would you have asked for a replacement? Even with a better replacement if I do get one, would you know how much better it could be? If there wouldn't be a huge difference, I will settle with the one I already have.
#4
[quote name='Sotirius' timestamp='1342357362' post='19432']

Thank you Klaus for your feedback. As I haven't owned a 24-70 lens before, I didn't know what to expect. Can you tell me how would the sample I have compare with the one you have tested, or with the 24-70 Canon ver.1? I did read the review, but i really don't know how to compare the results. If it was you would you been happy with this lens, or would you have asked for a replacement? Even with a better replacement if I do get one, would you know how much better it could be? If there wouldn't be a huge difference, I will settle with the one I already have.

[/quote]



Sorry but it is next to impossible to give you an accurate assessment without a formal testing.

As mentioned I'd probably call it a valid sample so the results shouldn't be far off from the lab test.

From f/5.6 onward the difference should be marginal in any case.
#5
I wonder if in the test article of each lens the decentering test result should also be included. Then readers can get some feeling about how a decentering test image looks like for a normal (non-decentered) lens.



Frank
#6
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1342533930' post='19448']

I wonder if in the test article of each lens the decentering test result should also be included. Then readers can get some feeling about how a decentering test image looks like for a normal (non-decentered) lens.



Frank

[/quote]

That could be useful. Most of the newbies like me, don't know what to expect and how bad the diference is between slightly decentred and badly decentred. I sent the lens back to the camera store for a replacement and I will see if the replacement (on order)will perform any better. Hopefully it does. I will keep you updated.
#7
I returned the lens back as the mediocre performance was not acceptable for the price range. In the future I would never buy a Tamron garbage lens again. I wonder how PZ rated it so high... If that Tamron was good, than all other lenses must be junk or I demand too much... I am happy that i returned it and I won't recommend Tamron to anyone. A few more things worth to mention about it, the flare is on a very high level, sharpness doesn't improve much when stopped down, and if you hate heavy vignetting -stay far away from it.
#8
Strange, your samples did not show "garbage" at all. I wonder what you would have said with a badly aligned Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM.
#9
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1343637730' post='19642']

Strange, your samples did not show "garbage" at all. I wonder what you would have said with a badly aligned Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM.

[/quote]



Look at the corners, they are smudged! If I'd get a bad Canon lens it would be, trash? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />

My 30 year old Zenit 55mm f/2 makes better images...
#10
[quote name='Sotirius' timestamp='1344397000' post='19726']

Look at the corners, they are smudged! If I'd get a bad Canon lens it would be, trash? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />

My 30 year old Zenit 55mm f/2 makes better images...

[/quote]

I did not know your 55mm Zenit went to 24mm wide.



Seriously, if you compare what 24mm on a standard zoom looks like to what a 55mm prime does..... A bit silly in my opinion.

If you can't live with vignetting with wide angle, do not get full frame.



And generally one does not photograph newspapers close by with 24mm.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)